• ampersandrew@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Man, this thinking sucks.

    So… the problem is they should just make better games? Really?

    No, the problem is that there’s no reason these games should have to disappear except that they were engineered to. All games are worth preserving, even bad games, even old games. It doesn’t matter that my friends and I were perhaps the only people in the world playing Rainbow Six 3 at that moment in 2014, because that game having LAN meant that we could still play it, and we would always have the opportunity to play it. The Crew, much to my surprise, actually found a substantial audience, and it is a different game than its two sequels, but now Ubisoft can force obsolescence in that game that people today are still enjoying in an effort to get them to buy one of the sequels. They shouldn’t have to buy the sequels to keep playing, and more than that, they should be able to go back to the old game whenever they want.

    • NuXCOM_90Percent
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      Again. Ideologically, I agree with you.

      When devs are already crunching 60-80 hour work weeks to launch a game and are increasingly worried about their studio being shuttered because they only have one or two fan favorite games in the pipeline? I don’t at all blame them for not taking the time to prioritize it to the 10 people who want to play the game three years after their unemployment benefits ran out.

      • ampersandrew@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Then they can’t blame me when I buy from their competitors instead, who prioritized a critical feature in the development of their game. (And also, building the game this way is a larger drain on their resources than if they built it without the server requirement. They just want microtransaction dollars.)

        • NuXCOM_90Percent
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 months ago

          Okay? Obviously you should buy what you value and if LAN support is a high priority, buy based on that.

          The point I have been making is that preventing the 50 people left playing a game after ten years from continuing to play is not “planned obsolescence”. It is just the reality of software development.

          • ampersandrew@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            It is planned obsolescence. I’m quite familiar with software development and its realities. They knowingly built a game that won’t continue to function in multiplayer after the plug is pulled.

            In any case, you and I aren’t going to agree, but I take issue with their definition of “full offline” for the reasons we’ve already discussed, and I’m disappointed that the answer I found in this thread is that they’re not interested in adding LAN to this mode.